Crisis in Iraq far from Over
by Matt Solomon, Staff Writer
In this article, I in no way wish to criticize the soldiers who fight bravely
far from home. I harbor no ill-will towards the individual combatant and only
disapprove of the handling of the situation by this administration. Soldiers
are merely instruments of a large and controlling government. I fully support
the troops and understand that they have no say in their assignments. It is
those who give those assignments whom I question.
Given that Iraq was already invaded and that the war is officially over, it would be irrelevant and untimely for me to criticize the fact that the war was started in the first place. Despite the fact that the war is over and has been declared mission accomplished, the problems are
numerous. Our administration overthrew the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein (a necessary task) without looking forward to the chaos that would inevitably follow. While the regime of Saddam Hussein was corrupt and brutal, it did maintain control. Before we overthrew it, we needed to have a specific and nearly flawless plan to immediately institute another governing body that would control the Iraqi people. Without such a plan we had no business going in and leaving the country in the state its in now. It may seem that these observations are a result of hindsight, but nearly everything that has occurred since the end of the war was predicted before the invasion but was merely dismissed as liberal hype.
The culture of the Iraqi people, combined with the natural behavior of masses left to their own resources, shows the extreme difficulties of establishing a working government. The majority of the residents of Iraq have a culturally instituted priority system that greatly contrasts that of the West and prevents the principles of government that work here from being applicable there. This is to say that the Iraqi people have an intense family priority; intermarriage is extremely common and, therefore, a persons loyalty is always to his or her family and not to the government or country. This causes a large amount of corruption, as people will happily accept money that could help their families, even if it is for a cause that is not for the greater good. This difference in loyalty will make any attempt to install a Western-style government futile.
The approach the United States military took in attacking Iraq, while effective then, is causing problems now. The use of a rolling start, meaning beginning the attack before full forces were assembled, has made the rebuilding process far more difficult. We did not have
enough troops there to begin with, and, as soon as the war was won, we began bringing troops home. This left an absurdly inadequate number of troops to maintain order and rebuild the country. Not having enough troops there now to control the population and to stem attacks has caused the untimely and unnecessary deaths of countless troops. The rate of casualties since the war ended (and theoretically the fighting stopped) is now far greater than the casualties during the war.
As the situation gets worse and worse, many people are calling for the troops to be brought home. This would be absolutely unacceptable. It is the simple obligation of cleaning up ones own mess that makes such an action cowardly and wrong. In fact, the U.S. must send more troops to Iraq in order to end all attempts at insurrection and establish some sort of effective governing body. In order to accomplish this, the U.S. must grovel to the United Nations, offer them full control until a stable government exists in Iraq, and hope they will help both diplomatically and militarily. This is necessary for there to be any order or peace in Iraq.